duh. this is why i've been saying hillary is the nominee--she locked in a network of supporters in the DNC and the party who owe her. and it's not just superdelegates

75% of Democratic delegates will be chosen based on each state's primaries. But the other 25% of delegates are super delegates that can vote regardless of their state's winner. And those super delegates are overwhelmingly for Hilary

...and are well-compensated for their loyalty.

Clinton 158

Obama 89

Edwards 26

Richardson 20

Dodd 15

Biden 8

Kucinich 1

Gravel 0

Yeah! Regardless of the primary outcome, at least one person will stand up at the convention and make sure my voice is heard. Go DK!

the article said that Dean had the majority of the Super Delegates in 2004 prior to the primaries.

It's a good thing The Surge has cleaned up Iraq and made it such a great place to live, when Hillary is elected the Republicans will have a safe place to go for 4 years.

I wonder who in the Democratic party other than those in charge of it sees the "superdelegate" concept as a good thing.

It would be like 1/4 of the electoral college being a group of people who just vote how they want to.

crunchyfist: the article said that Dean had the majority of the Super Delegates in 2004 prior to the primaries.

This right here.
Dean did have the majority of super delegates going into the primaries, and it didn't help him one bit. Because after he lost Iowa those super delegates began to waver on him and switch to Kerry.

Code_Archeologist:

This right here.
Dean did have the majority of super delegates going into the primaries, and it didn't help him one bit. Because after he lost Iowa those super delegates began to waver on him and switch to Kerry.

Yeah, but those delegates voted for Dean before they voted against him.

Ahh yes... 1/4 of delegates to make sure the people's voices are neutralized and power is kept with those who play inside the beltway...

Mordant: It's a good thing The Surge has cleaned up Iraq and made it such a great place to live, when Hillary is elected the Republicans will have a safe place to go for 4 years.

No they'll join all the liberal actors who said they'd move to Canada if Bush won.

just the fact that she's even in the race is a clear sign that America is doing something very very wrong.

Oh no! Clinton has 158 delegates out of a possible 4,050. It's all but over!

I hate horse race political reporting.

House of Tards: Oh no! Clinton has 158 delegates out of a possible 4,050. It's all but over!

I hate horse race political reporting.

Not that I completely disagree with you, but she has roughly 8% of the necessary delegates committed to her before a vote is even cast. Obama has roughly 4.5% committed to him. That is a significant difference should the race turn out to be very close. And if the final result should ever change based on the super delegates, I'd be pretty pissed.

/Kucinich has about .05%. He's on his way!

However, the ultra and hyper delegates are up for grabs.

Three Crooked Squirrels:

/Kucinich has about .05%. He's on his way!

On his way to make some more crackers and cookies?

Three Crooked Squirrels: Kucinich 1

He's married. Did his wife not vote, or did he vote for someone else?

Three Crooked Squirrels:

Not that I completely disagree with you, but she has roughly 8% of the necessary delegates committed to her before a vote is even cast. Obama has roughly 4.5% committed to him. That is a significant difference should the race turn out to be very close. And if the final result should ever change based on the super delegates, I'd be pretty pissed.

But as it said in TFA, Dean had super delegates locked up that changed their mind after the vote. The whole "Hillary is inevitable" thing is just flat not true. Sure, she could win the nomination, but there hasn't been a single vote cast yet. Hell remember 2004? Hillary was going to create a brokered convention and jump in and steal the nomination, people were just sure of it.

On the bigger picture articles like this don't tell us jack shiat about the actual candidates. All reporters cover is poll results and gossip. There are a lot of questions that would make us a more informed populace about our candidates.

If the reporters would try to find out:

What substantive differences are there between the three major Democrats?

Why does R*n P**l have so much money coming in yet polls so low? Compare to Huckabee who is polling high and has no money coming in.

Bring on some health care wonks to tell us about the possible effects of the Democrats health care plans. Bring on a non-Austrian economist to talk about the R*n P**l monetary plan.

Find out why the Republicans have veered right on immigration policy when polls show that it is a lower priority to many voters than most of us think.

Instead the media treats this whole thing like it's a goddamn basketball game.

"You know that Allen Iverson has 5% body fat, Bill?"

"No, but I know that Fred Thompson smells like Old Spice, Ted."

Sorry Three Crooked Squirrels. This isn't a rant at you, as much as it's just that election coverage makes me stabby. I like politics and work my ass off to make time to inform myself, but a lot of people don't have a passion for politics or the time to find out about the candidates, so all they hear is this pointless crap.

Wow. Wall of text.

Shorter me: Yeah, I'll be pissed too if the results change, but if the media would actually report, there's a chance that it wouldn't even be an issue.

Sounds like the media trying to pick a winner before the voting starts.

But do they have Diebold and Florida?

Ah-HA!

Alphax: Sounds like the media trying to pick a winner before the voting starts.

Man, they've been doing that all year. And all the time people were playing nice, the media basically played the devil on everyone's shoulder, going "Attack that guy. Go on, attack him. You know you want to. Attack him or we won't cover you because honorable candidates can't possibly be President."

Afternoon_Delight: You people are funny.

3/10, not down to your usual standards. A reference to "Hitlerly" would have awarded extra credit.

Snarfangel: However, the ultra and hyper delegates are up for grabs.

What about the delegates that have gone plaid?

House of Tards

I don't disagree with you in the slightest. I just don't think super delegates should exist. If a nomination swung on the votes of super delegates, I'd be pissed off. So would that party's constituents, who would then possibly be turned off in the general election, thinking "we voted for X, but our party put up Y. I think I'll stay home this November."

revskippy: I wonder who in the Democratic party other than those in charge of it sees the "superdelegate" concept as a good thing.

It would be like 1/4 of the electoral college being a group of people who just vote how they want to.

How's about %100?

Hillary will crush the dream that is Obama.

This is the scariest election in my lifetime.

most of these super delegates will end up going to the candidate who wins in the primary/caucus delegate count. I can think of one super delegate that is %100 locked up, but that's it. It will start getting dicey if the delegate count ends up really close...if the GOP does this same thing (do they?) it's going to be really crazy because I think that is going to be a brokered convention already.

It would be like 1/4 of the electoral college being a group of people who just vote how they want to.

Look up "faithless elector". The people who actually choose the President don't have to vote in the manner the majority in your state prescribe. 99.99% of voters could vote Kucinich or whatever and the electors could still select Hillary on their own. There are laws in 24 states assigning various legal penalties for doing so, but that doesn't invalidate the electoral vote once cast. I guess you could say it was supposed to be an emergency democracy kill switch for the gentry in the event illiterate hicks tried to elect a new king or something. Wiki says it's happened 158 times.

Time to drop some coin on Humana. Thank you, Hillary.

GrooveMonkeyZero: Ahh yes... 1/4 of delegates to make sure the people's voices are neutralized and power is kept with those who play inside the beltway...

Chicago 1968 again?

Everybody booze up and riot!

Three Crooked Squirrels: House of Tards

I don't disagree with you in the slightest. I just don't think super delegates should exist. If a nomination swung on the votes of super delegates, I'd be pissed off. So would that party's constituents, who would then possibly be turned off in the general election, thinking "we voted for X, but our party put up Y. I think I'll stay home this November."

Oh I agree, but we haven't had a brokered convention in over 50 years. I don't think that 2008 is going to be any different.

Although the Muslims for Kucinich are pulling for one.

YA RLY (new window)

Who needs delegates isnt bushie going to declare himself empourer for life ....hell congress will probably ratify it because they don't want to appear weak on military matters

Three Crooked Squirrels: Yeah! Regardless of the primary outcome, at least one person will stand up at the convention and make sure my voice is heard. Go DK!

That's probably Kucinich himself. As a sitting Congressman, he's a super-delegate. As are Clinton, Dodd, Biden, and Obama.

Neeek:

That's probably Kucinich himself. As a sitting Congressman, he's a super-delegate. As are Clinton, Dodd, Biden, and Obama.

Hmmm. I did not know that. TMYK.

Want to see what a brokered convention might look like?
Liberal Party of Canada had one in 2006.


8 Candidates, 4 rounds of voting, and a result that nobody could have predicted. (Linky pop)

Skip to about 4:10 to see the results announced.

Most exciting moment in politics that I have ever been a part of. (Those Kennedy signs are for Gerard Kennedy, for whom I was an elected delegate going into the convention, he placed 4th)

In Iran, an elected body called "The Council of Experts" gets to vote for the new Supreme Leader.

In America, we only elect part of our "Council of Experts." The rest are undemocratically-chosen "Super Delegates."

Clearly we are a pure democracy and Iran is a authoritarian dictatorship.

sigh - the more i look the less i know about the candidates. Really - wtf is the difference between obama, kusinich, or hilary? Imean - you hear abunch of horseshiat about whos going to visit mexico in the first year of office but not a single page on the internet listing the candidates priorities. So much for requireing an educated population to conduct democratic process.

But then again looking to the states for an educated population was never a good idea.


\BRING ON THE FASCISM!!!!
\\ Brandine - get me ma jew stompin boots!!!!

revskippy: I wonder who in the Democratic party other than those in charge of it sees the "superdelegate" concept as a good thing.

It would be like 1/4 of the electoral college being a group of people who just vote how they want to.

Considering that electors can vote for whomever they wish in 21 states and ignore the choice they were sent to vote for, I would say that is an accurate analogy.